Despite evidence that informational interventions can influence K–12 school choices, we know little about the mechanisms through which they work and the factors that produce heterogeneity in student responses. Through a school-level randomized controlled trial conducted in 473 New York City middle schools serving 115,000 eighth graders, we evaluated three counselor-delivered informational interventions that were designed to help students avoid low-graduation high schools, but differed in their level of individual customization and mode of delivery (paper or online). Every intervention reduced likelihood of application to and enrollment in low-graduation-rate schools (those below the city median of 75%). Simplified paper interventions had the largest impacts and produced lower heterogeneity in effects across subgroups than customizable digital formats. A key mechanism by which interventions worked was through new information replacing students’ default first-choice schools that had low graduation rates and guaranteed admission. We conclude that informational interventions to support school choice can be effectively implemented at scale via school counselors, but that intervention design can lead to differences in who engages, with consequences for inequality.
AbaluckJ.GruberJ. (2016). Improving the quality of choices in health insurance markets (National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 22917). National Bureau of Economic Research.
2.
AbdulkadiroğluA.AngristJ.PathakP. (2014). The elite illusion: Achievement effects at Boston and New York exam schools. Econometrica, 82(1), 137–196.
3.
AbdulkadiroğluA.AngristJ. D.NaritaY.PathakP. A. (2017, December). Impact evaluation in ma-tching markets with general tie-breaking (National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 24172). National Bureau of Economic Research.
4.
AbdulkadiroğluA.PathakP. A.RothA. E. (2005). The New York City high school match. American Economic Review, 95(2), 364–367.
5.
AbdulkadiroğluA.PathakP. A.RothA. E. (2009). Strategy-proofness versus efficiency in matching with indifferences: Redesigning the NYC high school match. American Economic Review, 99(5), 1954–1978.
6.
AinsworthR.DehejiaR.Pop-ElechesC.UrquiolaM. (2020). Information, preferences, and household demand for school value added (National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 28267). National Bureau of Economic Research.
7.
AjayiK. F.FriedmanW. H.LucasA. M. (2020, October). When information is not enough: Evidence from a centralized school choice system (National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 27887). National Bureau of Economic Research.
8.
AllendeA.GallegoF.NeilsonC. (2019). Approximating the equilibrium effects of informed school choice (Working Papers 2019-16), Princeton University. Economics Department.
9.
AllensworthE. M.MooreP. T.SartainL.de la TorreM. (2017). The educational benefits of attending higher performing schools: Evidence from Chicago high schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(2), 175–197.
10.
AndrabiT.DasJ.KhwajaA. I. (2017). Report cards: The impact of providing school and child test scores on educational markets. American Economic Review, 107(6), 1535–1563.
11.
AngristJ. D.CohodesS. R.DynarskiS. M.PathakP. A.WaltersC. R. (2016). Stand and deliver: Effects of Boston’s charter high schools on college preparation, entry, and choice. Journal of Labor Economics, 34(2), 275–318.
12.
ArcidiaconoP.LovenheimM. (2016). Affirmative action and the quality-fit trade-off. Journal of Economic Literature, 54(1), 3–51.
13.
ArteagaF.KaporA. J.NeilsonC. A.ZimmermanS. D. (2021). Smart matching platforms and heterogeneous beliefs in centralized school choice (Nati-onal Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 28946). National Bureau of Economic Research.
14.
BalfanzR.BridgelandJ. M.MooreL. A.FoxJ. H. (2010). Building a grad nation: Progress and challenge in ending the high school dropout epidemic. Civic Enterprises.
15.
BalfanzR.LegtersN. (2004). Locating the dropout crisis: Which high schools produce the nation’s dropouts? Where are they located? Who attends them? (Report 70). Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk (CRESPAR).
16.
BergmanP.DenningJ. T.ManoliD. (2019). Is information enough? The effect of information about education tax benefits on student outcomes. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 38(3), 706–731.
17.
BettingerE. P.LongB. T.OreopoulosP.SanbonmatsuL. (2012). The role of application assistance and information in college decisions: Results from the H&R Block FAFSA experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127(3), 1205–1242.
18.
BhargavaS.ManoliD. (2015). Psychological frictions and the incomplete take-up of social benefits: Evidence from an IRS field experiment. American Economic Review, 105(11), 3489–3529.
19.
BloomH. S.UntermanR. (2014). Can small high schools of choice improve educational prospects for disadvantaged students?Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 33(2), 290–319.
Bridwell-MitchellE. N. (2015). Theorizing teacher agency and reform: How institutionalized instructional practices change and persist. Sociology of Education, 88(2), 140–159.
22.
Bridwell-MitchellE. N.ShererD. G. (2017). Institutional complexity and policy implementation: How underlying logics drive teacher interpretations of reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(2), 223–247.
23.
BruhnM.McKenzieD. (2009). In pursuit of balance: Randomization in practice in development field experiments. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1(4), 200–232.
Citizen’s Committee for Children. (2020). New York City’s digital divide: 500,000 NYC households have no internet access when it is more important than ever before. Citizen’s Committee for Children of New York City.
26.
CoburnC. E. (2004). Beyond decoupling: Rethinking the relationship between the institutional environment and the classroom. Sociology of Education, 77(3), 211–244.
27.
ConlonJ. J. (2019). Major malfunction: A field experiment correcting undergraduates’ beliefs about salaries. Journal of Human Resources, 56, 922–939.
28.
CorcoranS.JenningsS.CohodesS. R.Sattin-BajajC. (2017). Administrative complexity as a barrier to school choice: Evidence from New York City [Unpublished working paper, New York University].
29.
CorcoranS. P.JenningsJ. L.CohodesS. R.Sattin-BajajC. (2018). Leveling the playing field for high school choice: Results from a field experiment of informational interventions (National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 24471). National Bureau of Economic Research.
30.
DemingD. J.HastingsJ. S.KaneT. J.StaigerD. O. (2014). School choice, school quality, and postsecondary attainment. American Economic Review, 104(3), 991–1013.
31.
DynarskiS.LibassiC.MichelmoreK.OwenS. (2021). Closing the gap: The effect of reducing complexity and uncertainty in college pricing on the choices of low-income students. American Economic Review, 111(6), 1721–1756.
32.
FineM. (1991). Framing dropouts: Notes on the politics of an urban high school. SUNY Press.
33.
FinkelsteinA.NotowidigdoM. J. (2019). Take-up and targeting: Experimental evidence from SNAP. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134(3), 1505–1556.
34.
GlazermanS.Nichols-BarrerI.ValantJ.ChandlerJ.BurnettA. (2020). The choice architecture of school choice websites. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 13(2), 322–350.
35.
GurantzO.HowellJ.HurwitzM.LarsonC.PenderM.WhiteB. (2021). A national-level informational experiment to promote enrollment in selective colleges. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 40(2), 453–479.
36.
HastingsJ. S.WeinsteinJ. M. (2008). Information, school choice, and academic achievement: Evidence from two experiments. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123(4), 1373–1414.
37.
HoxbyC.TurnerS. (2013). Expanding college opportunities for high-achieving, low-income students (Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research Discussion Paper 12014). Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
38.
HymanJ. (2020). Can light-touch college-going interventions make a difference? Evidence from a statewide experiment in Michigan. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 39(1), 159–190.
39.
JacksonC. K.PorterS. C.EastonJ. Q.BlanchardA.KiguelS. (2020). School effects on socioemotional development, school-based arrests, and educational attainment. American Economic Review: Insights, 2, 4491–4508.
40.
JenningsJ.Sattin-BajajC.BurnsS.BrayA. (2018, March). The how, what and why of school choice informational interventions: Evidence from interview data. Association for Education Finance and Policy Annual Conference.
41.
JensenR. (2010). The (perceived) returns to education and the demand for schooling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(2), 515–548.
42.
JohnsonE.HassinR.BakerT.BajgerA.TreuerG. (2013). Can consumers make affordable care affordable? The value of choice architecture. PLOS ONE, 8(12), Article e81521.
43.
LincoveJ. A.ValantJ.CowenJ. M. (2018). You can’t always get what you want: Capacity constraints in a choice-based school system. Economics of Education Review, 67, 94–109.
44.
MizalaA.UrquiolaM. (2013). School markets: The impact of information approximating schools’ effectiveness. Journal of Development Economics, 103, 313–335.
45.
MoynihanD.HerdP.HarveyH. (2014). Administrative burden: Learning, psychological, and compliance costs in citizen-state interactions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1), 43–69.
46.
MrkvaK.PosnerN. A.ReeckC.JohnsonE. J. (2021). Do nudges reduce disparities? Choice architecture compensates for low consumer knowledge. Journal of Marketing, 85, 67–84.
47.
NathansonL.CorcoranS.Baker-SmithC. (2013). High school choice in New York City: A report on the school choices and placements. Research Alliance for New York City Schools.
48.
NguyenT. (2013). Information, role models and perceived returns to education experimental evidence from Madagascar [Technical report]. The World Bank.
49.
Office of the NYC Comptroller. (2014). Internet inequality: Broadband access in New York City. Office of the New York City Comptroller, Bureau of Policy and Research, Office of the New York City Comptroller, Bureau of Policy and Research.
50.
OreopoulosP. (2021). Nudging and shoving students toward success: What the research shows about the promise and limitations of behavioral science in education. Education Next, 21(2), 8–16.
51.
PageL. C.CastlemanB. L.MeyerK. (2020). Customized nudging to improve FAFSA completion and income verification. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 42(1), 3–21.
52.
SaezE. (2009). Details matter: The impact of presentation and information on the take-up of financial incentives for retirement saving. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 1(1), 204–228.
53.
Sattin-BajajC. (2014). Unaccompanied minors: Immigrant youth, school choice, and the pursuit of equity. Harvard Education Press.
54.
Sattin-BajajC.JenningsJ. L. (2020). School counselors’ assessment of the legitimacy of high school choice policy. Educational Policy, 34(1), 21–42.
55.
Sattin-BajajC.JenningsJ. L.CorcoranS. P.Baker-SmithE. C.HaileyC. (2018). Surviving at the street level: How counselors’ implementation of school choice policy shapes students’ high school destinations. Sociology of Education, 91(1), 46–71.
56.
Sattin-BajajC.RodaA. (2020). Opportunity hoarding in school choice contexts: The role of policy design in promoting middle-class parents’ exclusionary behaviors. Educational Policy, 34(7), 992–1035.
57.
SchwartzB. (2004). The paradox of choice: Why more is less. Ecco
58.
ValantJ. (2014). Better data, better decisions: Informing school choosers to improve education markets. American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
59.
WeixlerL.ValantJ.BassokD.DoromalJ. B.GerryA. (2020). Helping parents navigate the early childhood education enrollment process: Experimental evidence from New Orleans. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 42(3), 307–330.
60.
WiswallM.ZafarB. (2014). Determinants of college major choice: Identification using an information experiment. The Review of Economic Studies, 82(2), 791–824.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
